WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that authorities do not have to provide a quick hearing when they seize cars and other property used in drug crimes, even when the property belongs to so-called innocent owners. By a 6-3 vote, the justices rejected the claims of two Alabama women who had to wait more than a year for their cars to be returned. Police had stopped the cars when they were being driven by other people and, after finding drugs, seized the vehicles. Civil forfeiture allows authorities to take someone’s property, without having to prove that it has been used for illicit purposes. Critics of the practice describe it as “legalized theft.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the conservative majority that a civil forfeiture hearing to determine whether an owner will lose the property permanently must be timely. But he said the Constitution does not also require a separate hearing about whether police may keep cars or other property in the meantime. |
How Taylor Swift's British ex Joe Alwyn kept dignified silence during sixKnicks and 76ers got past injuries that could've ruined them. Now they meet in playoffsPSG loanee Ekitiké scores winner as Eintracht Frankfurt beats AugsburgCanton Fair sees surge in number of overseas purchasers: officialI'm a neurologistIowa lawmakers approve bill just in time to increase compensation for Boy Scout abuse victimsEvent to promote love of reading to be held in KunmingExperts on Taylor Swift’s poetry in ‘The Tortured Poets Department'Event to promote love of reading to be held in KunmingWNBA moving date of its preseason game in Canada to avoid potential conflict with NHL playoffs